Posted
by
Soulskill
on Wednesday August 31, 2011 @04:24AM
from the just-don't-tell-them-where-the-guns-are dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The notion of distributed processing isn't new, and its application to robotics leads naturally to the idea of a swarm of robots. However, most swarm-oriented robots are composed of many identical robots (such as The Kilobots). In this case, there are three types of robots: a 'hand-bot,' which can climb bookcases and grab objects with hands; a 'foot-bot,' which can drive around and carry the hand-bot; and an 'eye-bot,' which flies around and perches on the ceiling to provide a perspective to the other bots."
Another reader points out an unrelated but also-impressive video of Kinect being used to develop a user-friendly robot assistant.

I doubt any of this will exist anytime soon. We still can just barely manage to get the desktops in the lab to cooperate with each other on most apps. And it is just software, and they are connected with cables, which are more reliable and higher transfer speeds. Or is there anyone here who manages to use distributed processing on most apps on their desktop?

Several kinds of apps can already distribute their load across processors, workstations, and even operating systems. Most of our apps however don't do any of that. If I'm on an old, old, workstation running trying to run GIMP and Firefox with a bunch of web 2.0 apps, in an office full of idling quad-core workstations, the apps will still run slow as molasses. Even GMail and Google Maps won't run properly on old pc's anymore.

I don't know if it's Murphy's Law or something, but the technology to kill us or enslave us is always far easier to get working than the technology to help us better ourselves.Of course a big part of the problem is a lot of people believe that killing some of us makes the rest of us better.

Of course a big part of the problem is a lot of people believe that killing some of us makes the rest of us better.

Mathematically, they're correct.Kill off everybody except you and another random person, and you have improved the odds of being better than anybody else from microscopic to a staggering 50%. Kill him or her too, and you're the best person on the planet.

The real problem is the propensity towards thinking "best" is a synonym of "like me". So they want to improve others, not themselves. Religion makes this happen faster, by providing a framework for how others should be changed.

Kill off everybody except you and another random person, and you have improved the odds of being better than anybody else from microscopic to a staggering 50%. Kill him or her too, and you're the best person on the planet.

That's just "best" being undefined, which obviously is a requirement, so yes, you can change the sign without invalidating the logic.The superlative being undefined means the logic will also work with "prettiest", "most well endowed", or any other trait one can identify oneself with. Which makes it surprising that the human race has survived. I guess the Russians love their children too.

And it is just software, and they are connected with cables, which are more reliable and higher transfer speeds.

If I can see correctly, there are no cables at all between these robots. It's not even possible; how would the Eye-bot fly around with a cable attached to it?
The main point of the demonstration is to show how different types of robots can work together to achieve a task, not demonstrate distributed computing.

Wasnt there a/. story a while back about some University that developed an explosive that also released a short range EMP burst? iirc the Air Force wanted to use it to make missiles.

You make EMP by energizing a coil wrapped around some HE and then blowing it up. At least that's how it's done in the Tomahawk cruise missile. Perhaps you could put a coil of super-fine wire in the front of a shot shell, and put enough powder behind it to vaporize it.

Quote: "The evolution was controlled by "robot wars", and the only form that survived were swarms of minuscule, insect-like micromachines. Individually, or in small groups, they are quite harmless to humans and capable of only very simple behavior. However, when bothered, they can assemble into huge swarms displaying complex behavior arising from self-organization, and are able to defeat an intruder by a powerful surge of EMI."

Human beings among other mammals are comprised of many many fleshy robots that make up our systems. When nanotech reaches an apex, it will mimic nature to the extent that instead of three robots, you'll have infinite robots in any given robotic organism. The more the merrier; this is a survival tactic for organisms when cells die off or become injured the backup cells take over.

When a non-cellular robot is injured it must rely on the injury being located away from its repair features or the robot is written

This reminds me of the little robots that come out of the woodwork at the Guide's head office to clean/sweep up debris then return to the woodwork.
(coincidently the quote at the bottom of the this page is of Ford)